GE Service Performance

Archived Posts from this Category

May 20, 2014

Conservatory

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Consultation/Communication, GE Governance, GE Open Space, GE Service Performance
[5] Comments 

Residents to rally to save Caulfield Park conservatory

  • Andrea Kellett
  • May 20, 2014 12:00PM

A PROTEST is planned at Glen Eira Council tonight by people angry about the council’s decision to demolish the Caulfield Park conservatory.

The Friends of Caulfield Park say the council have thumbed their collective noses at the community by dumping plans last month to restore and repair the ageing glasshouse because it would cost too much.

Protesters are being urged to gather 15 minutes before tonight’s meeting at the town hall.

Organisers say they want the community to “demonstrate through your presence your disgust at the hypocrisy of a council who pretend to consult us, the community, and then decide it is a bit expensive, even though they are willing to pay hundreds of thousands, or even millions of dollars on open space elsewhere’’.

Last month’s council backflip came seven months after councillors voted unanimously to restore and repair the ageing public building and replant its gardens after a survey found that was what the community preferred.

Friends president David Wilde said councillors had let the community down and labelled the decision an “act of destruction’’.

“The community’s least preferred option was demolition but, for comparatively modest cost reasons, this is what the council has opted to do,’’ Mr Wilde said.

“The conservatory is an historic artefact, purchased from Rippon Lea in 1949, but allowed to fall into disrepair over many years.’’

The council received eight tenders to restore the conservatory; their average was almost double the budget to do the work; and Mayor Neil Pilling said those costs had to be weighed up.

The nearby amphitheatre will also be demolished.

Tonight’s meeting starts at 7.30pm, at the town hall on Hawthorn Rd

 

May 19, 2014

Development Plan

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, Councillor Performance, GE Council Meeting(s), GE Planning, GE Service Performance
[9] Comments 

The recommendation from Akehurst for the “Approval of Development Plan and Whole of Land Plans subject to Conditions’ highlights the insanity of the current planning system and in particular, this council’s approach to planning. First off, there is the recommendation that Council approve the development plans and then down the track approve further crucial amendments related to traffic management, drainage, Environmental Sustainability, construction, Section 173 agreements, etc. etc. In other words, give the green light to the developer and we will worry down the track as to the fine detail.

Residents are of course expected to swallow the guff that this development and council’s entire approach has been in accordance with the stated Community Plan objection of – manag(ing) the rate and extent of change to the built environment consistent with state and local planning policies to achieve a diversity of housing as sympathetic as possible to neighbourhood character.

Akehurst’s analysis (explanation/justification?) of the development plan runs to precisely 11 pages of mostly generalities.  And of these 11 pages many simply repeat themselves. The absence of detail is staggering. Not once is any mention made of:

  • Flow on traffic effects
  • Non peak periods are now regarded as being from 8.30am onwards.
  • No reporting on council’s own traffic analysis – in fact we doubt that they even bothered to undertake any such thing!
  • Real detail of amended Section 173 agreement, and so much more…….

Below we feature extracts taken directly from this report. The only concessions to residents are the imposition of increased balcony sizes (which are allowed to encroach on setbacks thanks to an earlier Amendment), and the requirement for screening. Readers should also note that when it suits, ResCode is called in as the ‘standard’, but when it doesn’t suit, ResCode is conveniently forgotten!

The development’s side setback to 3 Bond Street (to the north) and side and rear setbacks to 70 Kambrook Road (to the south) are required by virtue of the Incorporated Plan, to comply with ResCode. The development has provided the required setbacks and transitioning of building heights to these adjoining residential properties in accordance with ResCode requirements.

Amenity Impacts

Submitters have raised concerns with respect to potential overlooking from balconies and windows of the proposed dwellings. A review of the development plans indicates that a number of the proposed dwellings will have overlooking opportunities into the adjoining residential properties north at 3 Bond Street, to the west at 40, 42, 44, 46 and 54 Kambrook Road and to the south at 70 Kambrook Road. A condition forms part of the recommendation requiring windows and balconies to be screened in accordance with ResCode requirements. ResCode does not apply in the Priority Development Zone but has been used as a guide.

However, over half (250) of the proposed apartment dwellings are considered to have inadequate outdoor open space areas in the form of balconies. These balconies range from 3.5m2 to 7m2. It is noted that a majority of the apartments are comparatively spacious and range from 50m2 up to 108m2 in size. Given the size of the proposed apartments all future residents should be provided with a minimum balcony area of 8m2 in compliance with Rescode. Again, it is acknowledged that Rescode does not apply but is used as a guide. This can be readily achieved as balconies are an allowable encroachment for the specified setbacks.

It is noted that there is no requirement for visitor car parking consistent with Amendment C60.

Street Tree Planting

Council’s Parks Services Department has raised no concern with respect to the removal of existing street trees along Kambrook Road and Bond Street and the replacement trees proposed. Conditions form part of Appendix 1 requiring protection measures around the street trees to be retained.

Council’s Sustainability Department is satisfied with the Environmental Sustainable Design (ESD) features proposed within the development. There are two items which need to be addressed before the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) can beapproved. A condition has been included in Appendix 1 outlining these requirements.

A number of submitters have raised concerns that these development details are not in accordance with the Caulfield Mixed Use Area Incorporated Plan. Council has obtained independent legal advice which concluded that the dwelling numbers and retail and office floor areas set out in the Caulfield Mixed Use Area Incorporated Plan relate to a ‘tested development scenario’ and, unlike the height and setback provisions (which are fixed), do not restrict the development to a particular mix of residential or office development. The developer has indicated that there is currently no demand for office floor space within the area. However, should this change in the future then they would seek to incorporate office floor space into the development.

Both concept plan options show some significant increases in the road widths for both Normanby Road and the new Boulevard. These changes are required in order to accommodate greater number of road lanes for traffic as well as bicycle and pedestrian paths. As a consequence the developer will lose approximately 600m2 of otherwise developable land comprising up to 6 storey development. The developer is aware of this loss of development opportunity and is strongly opposed. It should be noted that this loss of land is substantially driven by VicRoads, Public Transport Victoria and Yarra Trams. The proposed double tram length ‘super stop’ is considered by the developer to be unreasonably opportunistic.

In order to ensure that the new Boulevard meets the objectives of the Incorporated Plan (which is to create a street that supports retail shop fronts) conditions are recommended within Appendix 1 which will allow for car parking to occur on the eastern and western lanes of Boulevard during non-peak periods. The additional road lanes will be made available to address the peak traffic periods. 

The principle used is that these additional lanes of traffic and intersection changes are needed as a result of the traffic likely to be generated by the Caulfield Village development alone.

Council’s Engineering Assets Department has viewed the Drainage Management Plan and has advised that additional information is required. A condition forms part of Appendix 1 which requires the submission of an amended Drainage Management Plan incorporating this additional information. In addition, a condition will require the submission of a Site Management Plan to ensure that stormwater runoff is appropriately managed (Appendix 1).

Section 173 Agreement

The existing Section 173 Agreement will need to be amended to incorporate the works required to Normanby Road (as outlined in the concept plan options) and possibly the Station Street new Boulevard intersection and Smith Street’s intersection with the Boulevard on Normanby Road. This forms a condition within Appendix 1.

A minimum of 73 off-street car spaces are to be provided across the entire Caulfield Village development site in order to accommodate existing visitors to the area.

Event Parking

The submitted Car Park Management Plan indicates that the existing demands associated with events at Caulfield Racecourse can be accommodated within the Racecourse. The on-site areas include the centre of the track, Guineas car park and Kambrook Road car park.

On this basis, the centre of the track, Guineas car park and Kambrook Road car park must all be available for public parking at “major events” (i.e. no marquees, no caravan displays etc. can be provided within the car parking areas).

Additionally, the on-site parking shall be cost free to encourage on-site parking (rather than in local streets further afield).

Loss of on-street and off-street spaces

Noting that as many as 192 on-street spaces would be lost in the streets abutting the development, some off-setting allocation must be provided within the proposed developments (across the entire site) to accommodate visitors to the area. The parking losses associated with the new pedestrian refuge in Kambrook Road (5 spaces), access points and road closure in Bond Street (20 spaces), access points in Smith Street (5 spaces) and intersection upgrade associated with Normanby Road (22 spaces) can be accepted.

It is acknowledged that Station Street experiences low – medium parking demands on non-event days. There are 190 on-street spaces in Station Street. Removing 130 of these spaces as proposed would result in 60 onstreet spaces remaining. Adopting the ‘medium’ parking demand (which is up to 70% occupancy), there may be a demand of up to 133 parking spaces in Station Street on a non-event day. It is therefore considered appropriate that 133 (demand) – 60 (proposed supply) = 73 spaces (shortfall) be provided within the development. Therefore, it is recommended that a further 73 offstreet spaces be provided across the proposed development sites to accommodate existing visitors to the area.

The on-street spaces in Station Street are managed via parking machines. The estimated loss of 130 on-street spaces in Station Street will correspond to a reduction in parking revenue (approx. $50,000 p.a). Any relocation /reprogramming of parking machines will need to be funded by the applicant.

PS: here’s one of the traffic proposals

Pages from May20-2014-AGENDA

 

May 16, 2014

The ‘Sell-Out’ Is Complete!

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, Councillor Performance, GE Council Meeting(s), GE Governance, GE Planning, GE Service Performance
Comments Off on The ‘Sell-Out’ Is Complete! 

The Agenda for next Tuesday night’s Council Meeting is out and, as predicted, the Caulfield Village Development Plans, plus the screen, plus the sale of land to the MRC have all been given the green light with some incomprehensible, vague conditions which are practically all ‘cosmetic’. One thing that residents should note is that after all the promises of ‘certainty’ the plans have now changed again. Instead of 20,000 sq metres of office space, there will not be one square inch of office space. Our forecast: another 20,000 square metres of residential cubby holes down the track!  And of course the argument remains that all of this is still in accordance with an Incorporated Plan which residents never got to comment on at the Panel Hearing for the C60! We will be reporting on Ron Torres’ recommendations in detail once we’ve had the chance to absorb the document fully. (PS: Correction – this should read Jeff Akehurst)

Several other items are worthy of comment:

LOCAL LAWS COMMITTEE

Meeting was held on the 9th April 2014, where the minutes of the last meeting was accepted. This previous meeting was held on the 6th May 2013. So this committee which is so concerned about Tree Registers, Meeting Procedures, Organised Sport, hasn’t met for nearly a fully year. What an absolute joke! And what has this current meeting achieved? We quote:

Classified Tree Register

The latest draft of the Tree Protection Local Law and associated documents were discussed. A number of minor amendments were suggested. It was agreed that the amended draft be provided to Council for further consideration.

Action – Corporate Counsel to amend.

Meeting Procedure amendments

The latest draft of clauses 225, 232, 238 of the Local Law were considered and a number of amendments were suggested. It was agreed that the amended draft be provided to Council for further consideration.

Action – Corporate Counsel to amend.

There’s also another item raised by Lipshutz which we assume could relate to the Friends of Caulfield Park and their attempts to advertise their Bandstand Concerts which Council in part paid for via a community grant. Here’s this item – make of this what you will!

Cr Lipshutz raised the issue of the placement of “A” frame advertising boards in Caulfield Park. There was a discussion on the current permit requirements and rationale for such permits.

 

May 15, 2014

Another Month Of ‘Major Events’?

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, Councillor Performance, GE Governance, GE Service Performance
[7] Comments 

DINOSAUR ADVENTURES is Coming to Melbourne, 6/21-7/20

May 10
9:05 AM 2014

DINOSAUR ADVENTURES is Coming to Melbourne, 6/21-7/20

Did you hear a roar? A stomp? The Dinosaurs are coming!

We are pleased to announce that Dinosaur Adventures, the Number 1 Attraction at this year’s Sydney Royal Easter Show is set to open in Melbourne.

These life-size creatures will be taking over Caulfield Racecourse this June and July.

Dinosaur Adventures is an exhibition that is captivating young and old alike. Explore a prehistoric world full of life-size moving dinosaurs and be amazed and thrilled as the greatest creatures ever to walk the earth return and come alive right before your eyes.

Marvel at the story of their 200 million year domination of life on earth. Watch them move. Hear the roar. From the ripple of their skin to the glint in their eye, you will think that the dinosaurs really are back!

Apart from this amazing animatronics show, you will be able to become a Paleontologist for the day. Children will be provided their ‘experts digger outfit’ and chip away at their very own fossil. Plus there will be many more dinosaur activities to take part in including dinosaur sand art, dinosaur library, fossil displays, dinosaur inflatable activity land, dinosaur sand pit, photographic souvenirs inside a life sized dinosaur egg and so much more.

Pegged as a must-see these School Holidays, Dinosaur Adventures is set to bring all the wonder and excitement of the prehistoric world of dinosaurs back. Get ready to be thrilled as you see Triassic period comes to life!

Open from 21 June to 21 July, Dinosaur Adventures will deliver a realistic animatronics show like no other that will capture the imagination of children & parents everywhere.

“We are extremely excited about bringing Dinosaur Adventures to Caulfield Racecourse. The Exhibition was seen by over 250,000 people in just 16 days in Sydney, and we can’t wait to bring it to Melbourne. This is an inspiring show for the young and those just wanting to learn more about dinosaurs. We are very happy that we can deliver such a realistic animatronics show, that can represent what the dinosaurs where all about, ” commented Keith Brown, Dinosaur Adventures Director.

The event includes:

· Explore a prehistoric world full of life-size moving dinosaurs.

· Be amazed and thrilled as the greatest creatures ever to walk the earth come alive before your eyes.

· Meet Fred and Barney from The Flintstones

· Fossil displays

· Become a Paleontologist

· Dinosaur sand pit

· Dinosaur egg photos

· Camp fire story telling

· In a heated Big Top

Melbourne get ready to feel the Dino-Roar Saturday 21 June – Sunday 20 July 2014!

General Admission $27. Under 3’s free

www.dinosauradventures.com.au

 

May 13, 2014

Spin Versus Reality!

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Service Performance
[4] Comments 

Today’s Caulfield Leader features the public advertising of the Glen Eira budget and Strategic Resource Plan. Once again the public is assailed with the following claims in its budget papers – Glen Eira Council is characterised by low taxing (rates and charges)….low spending……

How true these claims are, readers can judge for themselves with the following facts on past and projected rate increases in Glen Eira from 2007 until 2017 –

2007/8 – 6.5%

2008/9 – 6.5%

2009/10 – 6.5%

2010/11 – 6.5%

2011/12 – 6.0%

2012/13 – 6.5%

2013/14 – 6.5%

2014/15 – 6.5%

2015/16 – 6.5%

2016/17 – 5.0%

By way of comparison here’s what some of our neighbouring councils forecast for their residents –

BAYSIDE – Rating levels – Modest rate increases are forecast over the four years. Council proposes a rate increase of 3.9% in 2014/15 and 4.3% for the following thee years to 2017/18.

STONNINGTON  – General rates are projected to increase by 4.3 percent in 2014/15 and 4.3 percent over the remaining years to 2017/18

On top of this, staff numbers continue to climb dramatically – again in stark contrast to other councils which often have a much larger area to service and a far greater population. Here are the Equivalent Full Time figures and these do not include the number of ‘contractors’ –

Bayside – 396

Port Phillip – 795

Yarra – 706

Stonnington – 575

Manningham – 493

Moonee Valley 728

Whitehorse – 654

Glen Eira  – 775

PS: We neglected to point out the following –

  • Council no longer claims that it provides the largest pensioner rebate on earth. Instead, the language now states that the rebate of $270 is higher than in most Victorian municipalities. The government subsidy was $253 and for 2014/15 is said to rise to $258. That means that Council’s ‘largesse’ has been decreasing each single year and that this year will signal the magnificent sum of approximately $12 per pensioner!

PPS: After a decade of promises, delays, and inaction, the Tree Register issue remains in the land of the never-never. Action Items for the 2013/14 budget stated in its goals and measures the following:

Introduce Local Law which creates the framework for a Classified Tree Register- Local Law adopted by Council.

The 2014/15 Action Plan has ‘re-engineered’ this outcome by stating –

Introduce Local Law which creates the framework for a Classified Tree Register – Local Law exhibited by Council.

So here’s another example of a council resolution that hasn’t been fulfilled. Further ‘adopting’ and ‘exhibiting’ a Local Law are vastly different things. There is no guarantee that by June 30th 2015 we will be any closer to having a Tree Register in Glen Eira – nor for that matter even clapping eyes on what promises to be a highly controversial set of Local Law amendments.

 

May 8, 2014

Hansard – Southwick

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Open Space, GE Service Performance
[33] Comments 

City of Glen Eira Crown land

Mr SOUTHWICK (Caulfield)—I rise to raise a matter for the attention of the Minister for Environment and Climate Change regarding the Caulfield Park council depot and some Crown land located near the intersection of Glen Eira, Booran and Kambrook Roads, Caulfield, known as the Booran Road reserve. The action I seek is for the minister to explore with Glen Eira City Council the opportunity to relocate the Caulfield depot to the currently unused Crown land site of Booran reserve adjacent to the racecourse to free up parkland in Caulfield Park. The Caulfield depot is a large allotment within Caulfield Park on Inkerman Road and is used to store heavy maintenance vehicles and other equipment. Glen Eira has the lowest amount of open space of any Victorian municipality, and therefore the opportunity to create more recreational space must be explored.

I have spoken with local ward councillor, Michael Lipshutz, who regards this proposition very favourably. I am aware that council has in the past been agreeable to exploring options to move the depot on the premise it will not take away from recreational parkland at another site. I am also aware that Glen Eira City Council has rejected our offer for it to use the land for parkland. In addition, I have had discussions with Friends of Caulfield Park representatives who agree that shifting the Caulfield depot to the unused Booran reserve would free up further premium open space in Caulfield Park; which would be a big win for the Caulfield community. Glen Eira Debates, a community blog site, has had many locals voice their strong opinions on the matter. There has been overwhelming support from locals for the Caulfield Park depot to be relocated to free up additional open space. Caulfield Park is used and loved by all locals, and to open up additional recreational space in this suburban oasis would be fantastic.

I would greatly appreciate the minister exploring the opportunity with Glen Eira council to provide Caulfield residents with additional recreational open space by examining this opportunity, which would also allow the Caulfield Park depot to be located at the unutilised Booran reserve Crown land and free up much-needed space in the beautiful Caulfield Park, the jewel of open space in Caulfield.

 

May 5, 2014

The Budget

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Service Performance
[5] Comments 
  • Child care fees up $5 per day
  • Expediture on drains remains at $3.5m which doesn’t even cover inflation and cost increases
  • GESAC fees up 3.5% (until January, then predictably higher) PLUS the following expenses –$261,000 for legal fees; GESAC plant and equipment – $86,000; Gesac defects rectification $617,320;Gesac refit administration area 1st floor stairwell with 3 consulting rooms for new therapy services $200,000
  • Government contribution to the pensioner rebate continues to rise – meaning that Council’s ‘largesse’ diminishes year after year.
  • Staff numbers of course keep rising!
  • The only REDUCTION in fees applies to some of the rubbish bin size collection.
 

May 2, 2014

Highest Rating Increase Council!

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Service Performance
[6] Comments 

Council

Rate Increase

Projected Capital Works
GLEN EIRA 6.5% 35.1 million

(8 Million is carry –over from 2013/4)
MONASH 6.0% 27.0 million
BOROONDARA 4.6% 54.11 million
MANNINGHAM 4.5% 31.23 million
STONNINGTON 4.3% 36.5 million
MOONEE VALLEY 6.0% 36.5 million
YARRA CITY 5.4% 35.6 million
WHITEHORSE 5.8% 29.0 million
BAYSIDE 3.9% 27.8 million
KINGSTON Not available as yet  
PORT PHILLIP 4.75% 32.73 million
FRANKSTON 5.5% 50.73 million
 

May 1, 2014

Come One, Come All!

Posted by gleneira under Caulfield Racecourse/C60, Councillor Performance, GE Consultation/Communication, GE Planning, GE Service Performance
[30] Comments 

Next Wednesday, the 7th May, will see the Planning Conference for the Big Screen at Caulfield Racecourse take place.

TIME: 6.30pm

CHAIR: Cr Jim Magee

VENUE: Town Hall

We can only hope that this time:

  • doors will not be locked
  • that clear directions are provided to residents so they can find the exact location
  • that enough plans are provided to go around
  • that the MRC deigns to appear and answer questions, and
  • that in future Council consider that 6.30pm is NOT the best time for such meetings if their objective is to truly engage with residents!

+++++++++++++

PS: and if any further evidence was needed to prove how Glen Eira City Council operates in contrast to its neighbours, we provide the following:

Residents and councillors reject State Government call for greater housing density in Boroondara

  • Greg Gliddon
  • Progress Leader
  • May 01, 2014 10:36AM
0
Boroondara residents and councillors have rejected a call from Planning Minister Matthew

Boroondara residents and councillors have rejected a call from Planning Minister Matthew Guy for an increase to the proportion of residential growth zones in the municipality. Source: News Limited

ANGRY residents and councillors have rejected last-minute planning zone changes that would see more neighbourhoods opened up to 13.5m-high residential developments.

More than 600 residents packed into the Camberwell Town Hall this week to hear councillors unanimously reject a planning scheme amendment that would see a greater proportion of residential areas allocated the Residential Growth Zone.

It was originally planned for 0.8 per cent of areas to be given the zone, under amendment C190. Planning Minister Matthew Guy asked for this to be increased to 2.5 per cent, under amendment C199.

A total of 123 residents wanted to speak at the special planning committee meeting, of which 52 were heard. The meeting stretched into the early hours of Tuesday morning.

Cr Jim Parke described the proposed changes as “utter nonsense”.

“What was put forward (originally) is a great outcome for Boroondara and council had every right to expect they would be approved by the minister,” Cr Parke said.

“Not for one moment did council tend to alter the protection of our city. It goes to show with the depth of feeling here tonight, that should also be conveyed to our local state members.”

Boroondara Residents Association President Jack Roach said there had been an unnecessary delay in approving the C190 amendment, which many people had found “unacceptable and detrimental” to the region.

“We request the minister approve C190 without delay,” he said.

‘There are 700 people here tonight who do not like this growth. These added bits are an insult to us all and the minister has to be told the people are not happy with this.”

The Leader asked Mr Guy’s office for a response to the meeting and details of when he plans to finalise planning scheme amendment C190.

A spokesman for Mr Guy said “An independent advisory committee is considering the merits of this issue and will give a recommendation back to the minister.”

++++++++++

And from Council Minutes 29/4 –

It has become apparent overtime, the Gallery feel we should have the opportunity to be able to speak as we are a democratic country. Instead we’re being gagged. Afterall we the ratepayers are paying the Councillors wages. So a motion should and needs to be passed on the above. During a meeting with the Mayor (Neil Pilling) last month he said he would agree to the idea of the Gallery being able to voice questions with certain restrictions. EG: time restraints. If the Councillors are discussing a particular subject the Gallery should be able to interject and ask a question by raising their hand, which is allowable in VCAT. What’s the point of attending Council Meetings monthly when we the ratepayers can’t voice our opinions.

The Mayor read Council’s response. He said:
“Over recent years Council has considered the issue of meeting procedures including the provision for a public question time.
Council, by a majority decision, decided not to change the current format.”

 

April 30, 2014

Bye, Bye Conservatory!

Posted by gleneira under Councillor Performance, GE Council Meeting(s), GE Service Performance
[13] Comments 

In what can only be interpreted as a real slap in the face to community, 4 councillors last night showed exactly how hypocrisy reigns supreme in Glen Eira. For all the talk of ‘listening to the community’ and the absolute waste of public funds on ‘consultation’ year after year after year, it is the secret, behind the scenes ‘negotiations’ that matter far more than what ratepayers want. As Pilling so disingenuously stated ‘consultation is only part’ of decision making despite the fact that in September 2013 he had extolled the virtues and the binding nature of ‘consultation’ when he moved the motion to ‘restore’ the conservatory saying at the time that the motion ‘was justified by the consultation’.

The conservatory will be destroyed thanks to the votes of Lipshutz, Pilling, Esakoff and Delahunty – the latter seconding the Lipshutz motion. Hyams and Okotel were absent. Camden ward voters should note that this decision was supported by 2 out of their 3 representatives! Sounness, Magee and Lobo voted against the motion.

The hypocrisy mentioned above is made all the more apparent when we turn to our archives and highlight the sad history of the conservatory ‘debates’ over the years. Yes, individuals may alter their positions but certainly not for a paltry $200,000 and not when the community has spoken again and again about what they want done. This issue we believe is far more about integrity than money! As we’ve said, millions of dollars in budget blow-outs occur (ie Duncan MacKinnon, Booran Road Reservoir; car parks at GESAC) and no doubt will continue to occur. We therefore invite readers to peruse previous comments made by these four councillors at different times and ask themselves whether or not they are truly the voice of the people?

OCTOBER 2011

Pilling – sooner ‘we get back to restoring the facility the cheaper it will be’…

MAY 2013

Lipshutz – ‘There’s no suggestion’ that the place would be ‘demolished’…….‘it’s for the community to decide’.

Delahunty – important that community has input to get this ‘right’ but the question is what’s ‘right’. It’s always been her ‘ethos’ that the role of a councillor is to ‘represent’ and there are strong views about this issue and community groups such as Friends of Caulfield Park ‘can inform us’ and ‘own this process’ as to what it will look like down the track and not ‘spend the community’s money’ on what mightn’t ‘be the end result’. Said that previous consultation wasn’t about concepts and ‘possibly didn’t ask the right questions’ nor ‘broad enough’. Thus she thought that ‘we have to take the lead’ and tell people ‘these are the options’ and ‘hoped’ that community groups ‘take hold of this’. They should ‘inform us’ and ‘help us deliver’ the outcomes. Previous survey ‘only heard from 312 people’ and that’s ‘possibly not enough’ and wanted a ‘more ringing endorsement’ about what to do. ‘Will cop’ that this (ie consultation) has been ‘done before’ but ‘let this be the last time’.

Pilling: Said that the last resolution was to fix up the conservatory and ‘protect’ it and that this motion just ‘delays that’.

SEPTEMBER 2013

Delahunty – ‘that’s the process, that’s how it should happen’ that people are asked. ‘I really want to see the community involved in this’ so that in ‘ten years time’ if it comes up again. Wanted community groups to put forward their ‘great ideas’ and that it ‘encourages interaction’. ‘It’s a very clear outcome now’.

Pilling – acknowledged that there were divergent views from councillors but they were motivated by the desire to use ‘the conservatory better’ and ‘this has been justified by the consultation’. Ultimately ‘this is a win for everyone’.

 

« Previous Page — Next Page »